The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant made an extended photograph primarily for women who may be exposed to a bridge or clothes by suffering a very short half of the body, or by suffering a flag, and the Defendant posted the photographic material in E, and raises the inquiry of images by using the visual materials, such as “flag exposure accident” and “a thickness,” and thereby punishing profits. In light of the above, it is reasonable to view that the body of the women expressed in the video recording made by the Defendant constitutes “a part which may cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame.”

Therefore, even if the facts charged in this case were fully convicted, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged of the instant case is as follows: “Around November 2015, the Defendant taken pictures of the Defendant’s dSLR camera from Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu, Seoul, using the Defendant’s DSLR camera, and posted them on the Internet E site nine times on the condition that the female, who suffered a short amount of damage to his name, taken the bucks by expanding the appearance of the bridge whenever the above play equipment is sealed, and up to November 11, 2015, up to nine times until September 26, 2017, the Defendant taken pictures of the buckbucks and the bucks of the victim’s short name failure until September 26, 2017, and up to nine times on the Internet website, the Defendant taken pictures of the bucks, etc. using the bucks and the bucks of the victim’s body against his will to cause a sense of sexual humiliation or shame.”

B. The lower court determined based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court.